


\ 



F 153 
.037 
Copy 1 



H. 



A:. 



TO THE 






Electors of the State of 
Pennsylvctiiwh^ ^^ 




. FRIENDS AND FELLOW CITIZENS, 

APPOT '?, F- 1) by the convent ion tliat met at Harrisburg, 
'on the ith of March Jast, for the purpose of noininatinj; a ( an- 
<lj«late for the office of Governor, a comrniftee of correspond- 
ence to promote the election of William Findlaj, tie object 
of tlreir choice ; we solicit your serious attention to a <ew*ira- 
porl;int facts, and to inferences nafurallv arisiny; fsoni them. 
In the performance of (his duty, we shaii studiously abstain 
from the use of intemperate or indecorous lanaiu ".ge. We 
scorn to appe-.il to your passions. Our address sliall be to 
your reason and to your un<5erstanding. 

TliTce important points appear to ejiibracetliechief'eonsid- 
erations connected with the question, who i* to he ( le ,j;overn- 
or of this i;;reat state for the ensuinsi; three years ? wr.ieh ques- 
tion you will becuHed u,)on to "ecide on the serond 'l\iesd;iy iti 
October — These are, the claims, the mer^(^. and the fitness 
of tb.e candidates— the mode in which the nomination** wj-rc 
made — and the support on which the parties respectively rely, 
riiere are but two candidates for the office of governor — 
William Findiay and Joseph lleister — the former, as we have 
stated, nominate<i by the convention at HatTisbur^— and flie 
latter bv u meetinj^ at Carlisle. We proceed cursorily to re- 
view the mei'its of each. 

W iiliam Findiay was for a series of years a member of the 
le.!;i.datur<' of tiiis state, in this capacity his conduit and Ids 
vo("s merited and received the decided approbation oi" his eoa- 
stituents. From t«?at honourable and useful station be was 
by the lej;;islai use appointed treasurer of the state This higb 
and corsfidential offiie he has iilled with gceat reputation for 
ten years The tenui e is annual. And he has been uiufftrm- 
ly re-eieeted by tit« vi>tes of the dem(!C{'alic members oi the 
iei^islalure, and. miaiiimc<us:y, untd lust year, wlien, f ^r the 
first tiuic, a rsvai can;lidate was started airainst him merely 
on tiie ground that he was then regardeti as ii! efy to b*^ a can- 
didate for the aiiii*e of govesuior. Tiiis opponent, though of 
very respecta= h- itanding, and uniuipeaciied cSiaracter, receiv- 
ed but six out of the wfiole number of deaiocr.itio vot;*s in the 
jonn meeting of both houses uf the legir-iaiure. notwithstand- 
in,;- the most iiidefaligable ex'-rtioit:- of tiiosie who iiive been 
chiefly instrumental la the late nomination nf :\ir. Heisier,and 
the most ardent efforts to prevent, the re-el ection of Mr. 
. Findiay. 



i 



J) 3-7 

[ 2 1 

We bope you will duly weijfli these plain, simple facts. "We 
trusr we do not overrate their importance To us they ap- 
pear decisive as to the standini;. claims, and fitness of the can- 
didate whom we offer to your consi(UM'ation, and for whom we 
soliiit your support. lfejha>«, we see, been tried for a series 
of years in a situation n^flft in importanee.to that of j^ovcrnor 

a situation in which lie has necessarily become familiar wi<h 

those di'partments of state, which are iii'culiarly under the 
care and controul of the executive. He has piissed the ordeal 
of public scrutiny, pure and unstained. Never, till • he was 
contemplated as the candidate for governor,did the foul tongue 
of calumny dare make an attcmj)t to tarnish his character. 
And, un er t!ie j^oading exciteauents of jealousy what is the 
granl allej^arion ai^ainst him ? merely the exercise of th it ur- 
banity, anil tiiose hospitalities, tlie neglect of which would 
have 'been just subject of censure. In default of any real of- 
fence, this' has been tortured into an attempt to secure votes 
by appeals to the appetites of the electors. We are ashanu'd 
to notice such an insigniiicant accusation. We cannot help 
regarding it as j'.iscreditabie to the cause whicli it is intended 
to support. We have too much reliance on your intelligence 
and Judgment to fee! from it the least shadow of apprehension. 

Witli respect to IMr. Heister'sclaims, we are unable to per- 
ceive them He has been long in public life. But his career 
Las had so little to distinguish it, that we cannot very easily 
trace his proceedings. A.nd we hope to prove that in the few 
cases in which he appears to have taken a decided j)ai t, he has 
been radically wrong — hiscontluct has been in direct hostility 
wi h the principles of the democratic parly. 

Among the facts which establish this position unequivocal- 
ly, we must notice his anti-republican vote in the convention 
tliat framed the constitution of this stale. He there manifest- 
ed a culpable desire to abfldge tiie rigiit of suffrage in a nmst 
essential particular. The constitution, as it now stands, enti- 
tles tlie sons of all persnn.s qualiiied lo vote at eleetions, to 
exercise this important right between the r.ge of Iv/enly-one 
and twenty-two vears, whether they have pai ' taxes or not. 
An aristocratic atlenipt was nsade toc((nfine this right to the 
sons of freeholders, ht which a large number of our most 
useful and estimable citizens would be disfranchised at a very 
interesting period of their existence. This inroad upon the 
all-important right of suffrage commanded the support and 
vote of Mr. lieister. 
The fact is so strong and unequivocal in its cliaractpr,that it 
cannot be too deeply wcigheu. Jt is decisive of the question 
of the republicanism of Mr Hei^ler. Some of his friemis have 
denied it with great confidence — regardless of its being (hily 
recerded in the minutes of the convention. We annex an ex- 
tract from those minutes^ and sulcinoly pledge ourselves for 
its authenticity. 



[ 3 ] 

Extract from the Mnutes of the Convention r^fth- Commonwealth .t^' 
PennsLjlvunia^fiart II. fiage 94 

Saturday^ Feb 13, ir90. 

The following section beings under consideration 

" In elections hy the citizens, every tree an, of the ajj^e of twenty- 
one years havini^ resided in the st..te two years next before the days 
of the elections resi^ectively, and within t at time pai! a state or 
county tax, . hich shall have been assessed upon him at least six 

months before the election, shall enjoy the rights of an elector." 

Which was determined in the afBrmative. 

A motion was made by Mr. Sitgieaves, and seconded by Mn 
Ma\\ horter, to add the following proviso to the said section as amen- 
ded, viz : — 

" Provided that the sons q{ firsons qualified as aforesaid, between 
the age of twenty-one and twenty-two years, shall be entitled to 
vole, although tiny shall not have paid taxes." 

It was tlien moved by Mr. Ogden, and seconded by Mr. Hand, 
to amend the said proviso, by striking out the word fitrsons — and 
in lieu thereof, to insert the word ''■freeho ders." 

And on the question " Will the Convention agree to the same ?" 
the yeas and nays being called, by Mr. Ogden, were as follows, viz, 

YEAS. 
Hilary Baker, Baltzer Gehr, 

Samuel t)gflen, John Arndt, 

Thoni: s Jenks, Peter Uhoads. 

John Burcluy, John H >ge, 

William Ciibbons, D vid Redick, 

JOSEi^lI IIELSTER, Jonathan Shoemaker 12 
There were- 46 Nays 

The question on the proviso itself, was carried by 3- .iffirmative 
votes to 30 negative ones, among the latter, JOSEPH Hhl^ i EH. 
Every citizi-n who approves of cireumseHMnt^^the elective 
fraiiehise — who would adach peeu'lar privilej^es (o frefitoM- 
ees — who would wish to elevate one portion of our eitizens at 
the expense of the others — oug-'it, fir sal>e of eonsii^tenej, to 
supj'Oi't Mr. Heister, for this aristocratic vote. But aiitliose 
who are in favour «)f an equality of rit^hts — who are aii^ainst 
aecordiiiijj; distinctive privi!ej;es to a few — ought to carry td 
the election-j2;round, in October, their coudemnation of this 
anti-republican procedure of Mr. Heister 

We turn our eyes from this trait of conduct to the compen- 
sation law, on which it has been atteuijAed to establish a high 
degree of character for Mr. Heister It was confidently as- 
serted that he had not only opposed the passage of that law, 
but had nobly and disinter'siedly reiused to receive any mnre 
than the usual ( -ugre.'ss wages, six dollars per day. This re- 
port gained him great credit and numerous friends. It was 
regarded as a favourable augury of the qualities of the futuse 
govesnor. But unfortunately for * r. lleister those preten- 
sions were canvassed- the proper records were investigated — 
and it was found that these encomiums were wholly destiiute 
of foundation. Mr. Heister did not vote on the passage of 



C 4 T 

ilic compensation law. He was absent from the house. It 
is not for us to say whether lie ileelined voting, for the pur- 
pose ol screenini^liimself Fjoin th«' responsibility of sanetion- 
inj^ a bill wliicb lie foresaw vvouki be obnoxious — or whether 
his non-appearance was accidental. Suffice it to say, he was 
not in the house, and that all the applause bestowed on him for 
his slrcudous and patriotic opposition, <• vanishes like the base- 
less fabric of a vision " 

But i idependently of the encomiums bestowed on him for 
his imas;inary opposition to the compensation law, his fricHds, 
as we have stated, have been loud in his praise, for his refusal 
to accept more than the six dollars per day. Audit was uni- 
versally believed that he had received exactly that sum, and 
no more, from the treasury, flere again we discover, that 
when " weighed in the balance, he is found wanting," as much 
as in the former instance. The protest which, by this noble 
procedure, he was said to have entered against the selfish con- 
duct of his colleagues, had no existence but in the iuiagina- 
tions of his friends. The facts of the case are simple. We 
submit then\ for yonr consideration. 

At the close of the session of 1815-16, Mr. Heister, in com- 
mon with the other members of congress, received the full 
amount of his compensation of St 500 per annum. He had 
no scruples of conscience on the subject. The money went to 
enlarge his enormous wealth. The session of 1816-17 closed 
in the same manner, with full payment to Mr. Heister. He 
had no more scruples ihan before. But on the 4th of March, 
he was unexpectedly recommended as a candidate for govern- 
or at Carlisle ; and then for the first time did he feel any un- 
easiness at parta'ring of the obnoxious compensation. He was 
probably impelled by his friends to perform some popular act 
whereby to ingratiate himself Avith the public. Accordingly, 
he presented the surplus beyond six dollars per day, amount- 
ing to thirteen hundred and sixty-four collars, to the treasu- 
rers of the counties of Berks and Schuylkill. And this dona- 
tion, which comes in so very ♦♦ questionable a shape," vvas de- 
layed until so late as the '^9th of March. The time in which 
the measure was adopted, demands us much consideration as 
the measure itself 

It is hardly pjjssible to hesitate what opinion to form on this 
procedure, it has a most sinister aspect. If Mr. Heister be- 
lieved the compensation law unjust — if he believed that mem- 
bers of congress were not entitled to more than six dollars |»er 
day — if his disinterested spirit spurned at the idea of receiving 
tlje extra pay, why draw it from the treasury of the United 
States? Why contaminate himself with any part of the 1364 
dollars ? or if he believed it to be an act of duty, with the 
money of the ? nited Htates to relieve the landholders of 
Berks and Schuylkill from a portion of tkeir taxes, why not 



r 5 ] 

have paid the surplus to the treasurers immediately on his re- 
turn home ? why wait for the illumination arising" from his 
nomination as candidate for the chair of governor ? Had he 
adopted eitlier of these alternatives, there might have been 
less grounds for censure. 

We leave it to the freemen of the state of Pennsylvania to 
form a correctestimateof tiiis unprecedented trait of conduct. 
If it display public spirit, patriotism or liberality, let tUem 
reward it with their free suffrages, and elevate iVIr IT. to the 
station to which he casts his eyes. But if it bear on its fore- 
head the unequivocal marks of a sinister policy — of an awk- 
ward an<l tardy attempt to influence them unduly, we trust 
they will stamp it witb tbeir most marked disapprobation on 
the day of the ensuing election — and bar the door to the high 
office of governor against the man wbo bas formed so eri'une- 
ous an estimate of them as to suppose them capable of being 
misled by a procedure which a child could see tiirough. 

In the discussion of the fitness of the respective candidates, 
various other important considerations arise, which demand 
attention. Mr. Findlay is about forty-eight years of age. 
He has had long experience in the routine of public business, 
and that business intimately connected with the first executive 
magistrate. Should he he chosen at the ensuing election, and 
re-elected twice, which is as often as the constitutiojiai 'imita- 
tion allows, he will still, at the expiration of bis last period of 
service, be far younger than the rival candidate is at present. 
jVIr. Ileister has long passed the meridian of life. He is far 
advanced in its wane. He is, we are very credibly informed, 
not far from seventy years of age. Huppose, however, that he 
is but sixty -five This, most assuredly, is not a period of liTe 
calculated to encounter the duties of governor. In fact, had 
he filled that station for hatf his life, his advanced age would 
loudly call for a respite and exemption from its cares and its 
burdens in future. But it is really preposterous, in a state 
containing probably one million of inhabitants, as if we had 
not a single suitable citizen in the prime of life, to sel ct one 
bending under the weight of years, and at a jjeriod whet? the 
mind partakes of the decay suffered by th;- body, for a station 
which requires a considerable degree of e^sergy ; and let it be 
Observed, that had Mr. Heister's mental powers, w iien aJ the 
meridian of life, been of the highest grade, whscb no man will 
dare aver, he would be a singular instance of extraordinary 
good fortune, if they had not by this time experienced a great 
depreciation. 

It is of importance, in forming a correct decision on the 
subject of the two candidates, to ascertiiin who are their sup- 
porters respectively, Mi\ Findlay will !iave the votes of the 
great mass of the democratic party — of tbose electors whose 



[ 6 1 
votes aided to elevate Mr. Monroe to the presidency, who pla- 
ced the present governor in iUe chair — and to whom the 
democratic memhers of the cxistinj^ legislature owe their seats. 
On the other hand, Mr. Heister will have the support of a small 
poi'tion of the democrats, (hose who, in conjunction with the 
lederalists. voted for an electoral ticivct intended to exclude 
from the presidency, the respectahle citizen who has been ele- 
vated to that high station b,v so overwhelming a majority of 
the votes of the citizens of the union. He will, moreover, have 
the support of the fe<leralists generally, who, for the purpose 
of dividing and destroying the democratic party, have formed 
this coalition, with those men with whom, at no very remote 
period, tliey carried on the most envcjionied hosti'ity. Ponder 
well on this subject. It demands \our m(>>^t serious and so- 
ber reflection. Ask yourselves this plain question, will you 
become parties to this alliance, the consequence of which if it 
Ire successful, must be to reduce your party to insignificance? 
Will you imprudently <testroy, in a period of peace, the ascen- 
dancy which you preserved ihrough all the perils and hoiTors 
of war? will you impair the political standing of the state in 
the union ? We too well know your pul)lic spirit and patriotism 
to entertain any doul)ts on tbe subject. 

'] here is not an intelligent man in the state who can per- 
suade himself that Mr. Hesster has any chance of success, but 
by the powei-ful aid of thr federalists. Vo them if be be gov- 
ernor, he will indubitab'y owe bis elevation. And be must 
be devoid of every spark of gi*atitude, if be does not make a 
saital)le return for tae favor conferred on bim by this party. 
It beboves you deeply to weigh whether you are disposed to 
support a can(!idate wliose chicfreliance is placed on your po- 
litical opponents, or him who, if successful, w^ll be elected by 
a pure democratic vote — ansl whose proceedings will harmo- 
nize with thokse of the general government. 

This is a fertile topic. It admits of eopious details. But 
we are spared those details. The subject was exhausted in 
1804^, by Mr. Heister himself. Jn that year be put on record 
tbe most unequivocal tcstim<my against his present conduct. 
He addressed to his coristituents, ti»e citizens of tierks coun- 
ty, a long circular leti'-r, eoutaining tbe 'ollowing declara- 
tions which auatbeniuljze and seal tbe condemtiaii .n of the 
course he an«i bis fi (ends are now steering. By bis own pen 
he stands condemned: Here are his sentiaients — 

<• Above all frietids and felu»w citizens, adhere to true re- 
« publicauism — and do not suifer yourselves to be deceived 
»» either by federalists, or those who call themselves republi- 
*« cans, and yet at heart are federalists. An union with fed- 
« eraiisJs, in tlie least degree, I caunol approve," ;\3r. Heis- 
ter coMCtUues: " When republicans ma.e a common <ause 
*»witii federalists, though IT JSHOLLii BE> tOxi THE 



[ 7 ] 

« BEST OBJECTS, the republican cause must suffer."— 
Thus in 180* he clearly reprobated <' making common cause 
V'ith t!ie federalists" even " for the best objects." And now, 
by a most wonderful inconsistency, be and bis friends •• make 
common cause with tliem," to secure tlie office of (Governor 
for biniself, and the patronage of the office for bis friends. 

There is another strong and most decisive oI)jection to Mr. 
Ileister. In the year 1805, he made himself tsie instrument 
of giving general circulation to a most atrocious calumny 
against the whole of f lie democratic party. This was noth- 
ing less than that they were ripe for and determined on a di- 
vision of prop<Mty — an agrarian law. This unworthy and un- 
founded allegation was among the causes of the defeat of the 
democratic candi ;ate for Governor at that period. 

Let us now examine the mode of nomination, which has 
been the ostensible giound of dissatisfaction with tliose mem- 
bers of the democratic parly who have seceded, and who 
act in unity with the federalists. Their chief objection lies 
against a »' eaucj/s" nomination. We request your attention 
while we examine the system heretofore prevalent, and that 
which was adopted at Harrisburg last March. 

Tlie constitutions of the several states, as well as of the 
United States, have made no provision for the nomination of 
candidates for 5>ublic offices. On this important operation, 
whicli is in general, in its results very nearly equivalent to an 
election, they are wholly silent. This is a defect much to be 
regretted — a defect which the citizens have to supply at the 
approach of an election, in the best manner they can devise. — 
Different modes have been adopted for the purpose at differ- 
ent times and in ditTerent j)!aces. 

The nominations, by both parties, of candidates for the pre- 
sidency of the United States, have been uniforuily made by 
meetings of members of Congress ; and those of candidates for 
governors of the states, generally, if not universally, by meet- 
ings of menibers of the state legislatures. The objections to 
this system, radical and strong as they are. did not ioi' a series 
of years attract general atfenlion. It was acquiesced in checr- 
fuliy by the citizens throughout the union. 'Fhe |)revalence of 
party spirit extended the acquiescence to a much longer period 
than would otherwise have taken place. This appeared to be the 
plan best calculated to secure the unanimity of the parties 
respectively. Each of them was apprehensive of losing its 
candidate, if it departed from the received system of nomi 
mition,n!ore particulariy when their respective numbers were 
nearly equally balanced 

At length, however, the conviction ])eeame very general, 
that legislative nomination's were radically unsound, and that 
a different mode of nomination was requisite : And accord- 
ingly the college of electors, chosen by the citizens of this 



[ 8 ] 

state ^r tbo important purpose of electing a president of the 
United . tutes, and who met last Deceniher, after having per- 
formed the fiiiKtiioii!? for\vhich they were specially delegated, 
toftk up the tonsideration of the approaching election for gov- 
ernor And aiter a full and free deliheration on the reasons 
i'<}r and against the various plans tbat had heen either practised 
or suggested, tliey recommended a momentous change in the 
operation; that the deniocralic citizens of the various dis- 
tricts in the slate should assemhle at their usual places of 
election — and elect delegates lo meet at Tlarrisburg, on the 
itli of the then ensuing March, to nominate a candidate for 
governor. 

Let it be observed — and the observation deserves peculi- 
ar ittlention that tliere was n other body of men then assem- 
bled, or {JkeJy soon to assemble, to whom the citizens of 
the state of FeKns_\ivania could mure naiurully look up for 
such a recommeudation — and none, of course, so suitable to 
take cognizance of the affair. 'IMtis. no doubt, had its due 
share of iriiiuence in the acquiescence that took place. 

Tliat this was an imporiant and radical improvement will 
not admit ol a doubl. And it reflects a high degree of credit 
on the good sense of the state that this >ound recommenda- 
tion, which ntade a total and salutary change in a vital oper- 
ation of our elections, was at once adopted and acte<l upon 
throug'iiout the stale. It was worthy of, and honorable to, 
the respectable body by whom it wiss (5ro]>osed, and worthy of 
the state which thus so readi y carried it into effect. 

Meetisigs were accordingly held in every county of the 
state, except two. Delegates were appointed to 'ueet at Ilar- 
risburg. So2; r (Ji the counties delegate'^ the power of act-- 
ingfor then>, to their senators am! represefifatives in the state 
legislature. This they had an iiidnbituble right i<> do — ^lut 
the greater part elevtcd delegates for this esj»ecial purpose. 
Of the former Jtescrifition, there were, on the ilnnl vote. foHy- 
fonr menshf rs — and of the latter, sixty-nitfe, besides souie. who 
^vere not early enough acquainled vvitis tlu? fwct of tin ir elec- 
tion — an'5 one or two who, tiiough in llarrisburg, weic absent 
when the v«;te was taken. 

it may be asserted with perfect safety that a more respecta- 
ble body of n.e:T jever assem5)'ed in «r!e state of SA-nnsvlvinJa. 
Their procee'^in^.s were conducted widia most exemplaw de- 
gree* of digntiy, decorujn, ant! propriety. They sat ivri rvans- 
acted their business with open doors. They oourtrd ;t-}:; de- 
fied scrutiny, i'very man who chose, ha<5 free aumittanxc to 
the ga,llery. \Vhi_n ti-e final vote was taken, the numbers 
were. 

For Mr. Findlay, 99 
Mr. Boileau, 1* 



[ 9 ] 

The members who had voted for Mr. Boileau, came une- 
quivocally forward — declared their determination, as became 
good citizens, to submit to the voice of the majority — and 
pied^j^ed themselves to support, by every fair and honorable 
means, the candidate selected by that majority. 

We have thus given a candid statement of the origin and 
proceedings of the llarrisburg convention. AVe feel a pride 
and pleasure in the retrospect — and we trust that among the 
great mass of the liberal and enlightened democratic citizens 
of the state, they will meet with an unanimous and decided 
approbation. 

But, say the friends of Mr. Ileister, the meeting at Har- 
rishurg was '< a caucus'* — and therefore the citizens of the 
state ought to reprobate their proceedings and reject the can- 
didate they have submitted. 

We ask— and we hope for an explicit reply — if the proceed- 
ings of the Harrisburg convention are to be rejected on the 
ground of its having been <* a caucus," on what ground can 
the advocates of Mr. Heister ask or expect an acquiescence 
in the proceedings of the meeting at Carlisle ? This is a plain 
question — an answer to which is expected from the support- 
ers of that gentleman. 

It is rare to find a stronger contrast than existed between 
the two bodies, in their organization and in their proceedings. 

The Harrisburg convention consisted, as we have stated, of 
113 members, fairly chosen throughout the state, and the on- 
ly complete representation of the state that has ever taken 
place for such a purpose. But the meeting at Carlisle was 
composed of only thirty-nine members, representing not a 
third part of (he state, and several olthcse irregularly chosen. 
We have shewn the ingenuous mode in which the proceedings 
of the Harrisburg convention were conduet«d. 'I'lie Carlisle 
meeting exhibited a most marked constrast. They sat wi(h 
closed doors, with strong appearances of concealment and 
mystery. If ever there was a caucus, or conclave, that meet- 
ing was surely one. 

Can there be a much higher grade of inconsistency tiian those 
citizens are guilty of, who, on the ground of'« caucus," raise 
such a clamour against the Harrisburg convention, consisting 
of 113 members, from every part of the state, and who were 
themselves members, or are advocates, of the Carlisle meeting, 
consisting of only thirty nine ? 

There are fifty counties and two cities in this state : and 
according to the statement published by the president and at- 
tested by the secretary of the Carlisle meeting, there were 
but thirteen counties and the city of Philadelphia represented 
in it. There was not one member from any county west of the 
mountains. The representatives were from thccitv of Phila- 
B 



[ iO ] 

(lelpliia, counties of Philnilelphia. Chester, T.ancaster, North' 
ampton, Berks, Sehuylki!!, Oaiiphin. and l^elmnon. on this 
side of the Susquehanna ; and from Cuml)erland, Franklin, 
Centre, Mifflin, and Lyeouiing, he^ond it. 

We couhi liave gone into mueh more ample details — hut 
we have suffieiintjy trespassed on your patience — and we shall 
close with a brief recapitulation. 

1, Mr. Fifidlay lias been nom- 
inated by a convention from eve 
ry county in the state but t>vo 
and consisting of ' 13 members. 



2. Mr. I'indlay r-lies wholly 
on the votes ot the democrats. 

3. If Mr. Findlay succcevls it 
will unite the democratic' party. 



4. Mr. Findlay is supported uni- 
versally by the friends and ^vell 
wishers of the administr itors of 
the general and state govern- 
ments. 

5, Mr. Findlay 's public ca- 
reer has not only been free from 
censure, but has had the Mgh 
est testimony in its favor for 
ei.jhleen successive years. 



6. The proceedings of the 
Harrisburg convention were con- 
ducted in open day, without mys- 
tery or concealujent. 



1 Mr Heisler has been nom - 
inated by a meeting of from less 
than a third of the state, and con- 
sisting of thirty-nine members. 

2. Vlr* Heis'er's prin ipal re- 
liiincc is on the aid of the fede- 
ralists. 

3 If Mr. Heister succet ds, 
the seeds of lasting hostility and 
t f the prostration of the p^irty 
will be sown. 

4. The supporters of Mr. 
Heister were decidedly opposed 
to the election ot Mr. Monroe — 
They are, particularly the feder- 
a portion ot them, still hostile 
to him. 

5. Mr. Heister has been pro- 
ved to have committed various 
political sins of deep dye ; and 
even on points whereon his sup- 
porters have highly eulogized 
him, has pursued a sinister 
course. In proof of both allega- 
tions, we refer to his votes in the 
(onveniionin 1790 — liis calum- 
ny of the democratic party on 
the subject of an agrarian law — 
and tlie compensation law. 

6. The proceedings of the 
meeting at i'a»* lisle, were con- 
ducted with closed doors, and in 
complete conclave. 

7. Mr. Hei-iter, as far as in 
him lay, laboured to defranchise 
all our young men, arr vcd at ma 
tutity, for one y< ar, unless their 
fathers were fr eholdtrs. And 
lastly, 

8. After having in 1804, de- 
nounced as political heresy all 
associations wit'; the federalists, 
even ''for the best objects," he 
has now, through the medium of 
his friends, formed an alliance 
with them for his own personal 
aggrandizement. 



[ 11 ] 

Weigh well these things. Lay seriously to heart ihe high 
duty that devolves on you, and the I • poitatit consequences 
th^t depend on it. Perform that duty faitfifully to our com- 
mon country — and may her good genius direct your votes 
for the promotion of her best interests 

MATHEW CARKY, Chairman. 
PAUL COX, 
J\C;OB HOLfiATF, 
DANIEL H. MILLER, 
DANI5 <L PROVES, 
J. S. HUBER. 
Attest, 

PSTER A. BROWNE, Secretary. 

Philadelphia^ May 31, 1817. 



PRINTED, by order of the Committee of Correspondence tor the City and 
County of Philadelphia, by Jous 13 inns, 1817- 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



014 312 273 6 



